Eagle and the APA

[Flyby1206]

I think the fur is going to fly for the next nine months or so at AMR.

Actually, Eagle is hardly talked about among AA pilots other than to say it needs to go away. What and who replaces it is open to discussion.

What is the reason most APA pilots think AE needs to go away? Do they think it will be any cheaper/better to have a different regional providing feed? Do they think it will be easier to gain back flying once it has been further fragmented and given to several other companies to fly? I understand Eagle has obsolete a/c and desperately needs an update, but we have these a/c because of the apa scope section. Right now we cant buy any a/c 70seats of larger, turboprops or jets, because of the scope clause.

 

[Draginass]

What is the reason most APA pilots think AE needs to go away? Do they think it will be any cheaper/better to have a different regional providing feed? Do they think it will be easier to gain back flying once it has been further fragmented and given to several other companies to fly? I understand Eagle has obsolete a/c and desperately needs an update, but we have these a/c because of the apa scope section. Right now we cant buy any a/c 70seats of larger, turboprops or jets, because of the scope clause.

Although these are pilots and if you ask 10 different pilots the "reason" you'll probably get 25 different answers.

Probably for the same reason AE pilots didn't like CHQ or TSA flying for AMR.

IMO, it all distills down to fundamental scope and the opinion that AMR keeps Eagle only as bargaining fodder. I think most also believe that Eagle is not cost effective, especially now with expensive fuel. Add the frustration of 2000 still on furlough (with perhaps 200 just recalled going on furlough again), severe stagnation in career progression (not unlike AE), and a management stalling contract talks, and you have a rather serious group of people.

Recall that AA used to have the F100s which was basically a <100 seat airplane. Those jobs went away and AA pilots with them. Any further acquiescence on scope is seen as just giving jobs to someone else. The same as if the company contracted 50 seat flying to the likes of Great Lakes whose pilots would gladly fly it for even less than AE ALPA.

While in the past, AA has used AE against the APA, it looks as if the economic reality of operating <70 seat aircraft is coming home to roost. Just as AA uses the finest of contract print against the APA, the tables may have turned.

I, and I think most other AA pilots, think that 70+ seat aircraft can operate profitably without the overhead, and angst of another company.

What AMR will do with AE, I have no idea, but on the surface, they seem to want to be rid of it. Not whatever feed is left to provide, but doing it a different way, without the overhead expense of running a separate company.

I think many markets that the RJ was meant to serve are not not viable with 37/50 seat aircraft. I think that's going to drive the demand for many less small jets. With that, and the contract restrictions against expanding into the narrow-body market, AMR probably sees AE as having outlived it's usefulness. Unfortunately, any buyers also see this and hence probably no interest.

What will happen in the next nine months or so is far from certain or predictable. One thing for sure, each pilot group needs to protect their own interests. And unfortunately, with 2000 AA still on furlough, I would say any talk of 1-list is dead. There's just nothing to be gained by it.

 

[DGdaPilot]

I would say any talk of 1-list is dead. There's just nothing to be gained by it.

No offense, but that's the AArogance that got you boys into this boat.

 

[Draginass]

No offense, but that's the AArogance that got you boys into this boat.

Sorry, I don't understand. Can you be specific about what you're referring to as "this boat." Are your referring to finally being able to exercise the provision in our contract that restricts outsourcing of our jobs?

Also, arrogant in what regard? Protecting our jobs?

 

[nwa_contrails]

Deleted

 

[DGdaPilot]

Arrogant in general attitudes towards Eagle. AA needs feed, whether it be inhouse or contracted. Obviously APA didn't have the forsight (no one did) to know that the "crappy little" prop operators would morph into what they are today. APA had multiple chances to bring Eagle under their umbrella. But how many of your brethren would fly a J31 or Saab 340? A few, I know. But not much more. APA has no right to moan about whipsawing and scope when it's been their call all along.

Of course, nowadays AMR would be just plain stupid (from a business perspective) to let 13000 pilots (AA & AE) onto one union list and control all AMR flying.

 

[siucavflight]

I am sure bankruptcy papers are filled out and in the fax machine. APA persues this avenue and AMR voids their contract.

 

[Draginass]

Arrogant in general attitudes towards Eagle. AA needs feed, whether it be inhouse or contracted. Obviously APA didn't have the forsight (no one did) to know that the "crappy little" prop operators would morph into what they are today. APA had multiple chances to bring Eagle under their umbrella. But how many of your brethren would fly a J31 or Saab 340? A few, I know. But not much more. APA has no right to moan about whipsawing and scope when it's been their call all along.

Of course, nowadays AMR would be just plain stupid (from a business perspective) to let 13000 pilots (AA & AE) onto one union list and control all AMR flying.

Nobody's moaning about scope. AE was a contract provision that the membership agreed to, perhaps unwisely, but they did. Do they like it? No. Do they want to end it. Yes. However, they were also foresighted enough to put a floor on AA pilot jobs and restrictions on aircraft size. And that's what has been triggered now. It's no secret to AE ALPA that pilot floor is there, and they're not moaning either (at least not that I can discern).

As far as an engineered BK, it's not so easy anymore, and if it does come, it certainly won't be AE issues that drive it.

Could it be considered that AA might actually want the APA to revoke the commuter clause? I'm still mulling over why they might want to do that, but they're pretty crafty in that respect. I do know that when you think they're mounting a frontal assault, you'd better look to your flanks.

 

[siucavflight]

I, and I think most other AA pilots, think that 70+ seat aircraft can operate profitably without the overhead, and angst of another company.

Well as long as that is what you think then I believe that GA, and PB will probably do things your way.

 

[Flyby1206]

AMR is a follower in regards to the industry. They wont operate 70seaters at mainline unless everyone else is doing it. For this reason I would expect AMR to get a scope change from APA, find a third party to operate a token number of CRJ700s and/or EMB170s, then threaten AE and try to get lower payscales in exchange for the a/c. The whipsawing and fragmentation of flying will continue unless APA steps up during negotiations. Sad because AA is the legacy carrier closest to having all flying done by 1 company. I know the one-list concept isnt going to happen right now, but I would really urge APA to think of AE when they are negotiating the scope section. Keep it all in the AMR family, or else youll never be able to get it back.